Switch Theme:

Now is a great time to learn to play AOS  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in gb
[DCM]
Battlefield Tourist





On an Express Elevator to Hell!!

The concept of flanking is a core component of warfare and has been for thousands of years, or most likely originally when Zug picked up a rock and crept round the side of Zug to throw it at him from a 90 degree angle (realising that Zug would not be able to see him from under his thick furrowed brow), and right up to the present day.

As such any representation of warfare in wargames has to include it to be any kind of representation of the real thing. I know a lot of people got annoyed with the tail-end versions of WHFB that reduced its effectiveness, especially against large blocks of infantry (historically, this would have been one effective way that a smaller, well armed cavalry force could deal with larger numbers). With AoS I guess it is so far off the plane of reality (I haven't yet found the right combination of special-mushroom tea to help me understand what the hell is going on with the background! ) that I guess that would be an argument for the 'standard' rules of warfare not being present? But it does make you think there is a differentiation between 'game' and 'wargame', with something like AoS being in the former group.

I don't think it's even a fantasy/historical thing as there are many sci-fi/fantasy games that contain the tropes of flanking (even GW ones, WHFB, Epic etc.) but I suppose more about what the game is trying to represent.

Epic 30K&40K! A new players guide, contributors welcome https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/751316.page
Small but perfectly formed! A Great Crusade Epic 6mm project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/694411.page
Excellent discussion forum & information collection for Epic and other small scale miniatures: http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/index.php
 
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut





 nordsturmking wrote:
hahaha... No


What he said.
   
Made in us
Manhunter





Sticksville, Texas

Why go from one mind blowingly expensive wargame to another? If you want to stick with GW rules, switch to Blood Bowl.

Don't need different terrain, no more than 16 miniatures per side (besides the new Snotling team), multiple team tier levels for added challenge. Great competitive scene, and the game can be played online in the (near) exact same way as the tabletop on Xbox, PS4, and PC... it will even teach you the game in the campaign.

Besides that, far too many generic rulesets you can just use your 40k stuff in to again switch to another expensive wargame.
   
Made in pl
Been Around the Block




AoS... I still remember the meme.



I guess no, thank you, not an enticing alternative to any game.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2020/08/21 16:51:28


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Falls Church, VA

To be fair on the flanking thing, I think "here are some bonuses for flanking, woo!" isn't really that realistic either, even if it makes getting a flank desirable.

Instead, flanking should be an emergent property of the way models work on the table (just like it was in real life. Zug didn't get a +1 to-hit just because he was outside of Dug's forwards 90 degree arc). How do to this?

Well, take a game like Lord of the Rings. I play easterlings, who use a pike phalanx as one of their core army components a-la Macedonian/Alexandrian armies. Nothing in the rules causes me to rank up, nothing in the rules requires my models to stay together, and nothing in the rules even makes or defines what a "unit" is; each man operates independently.

AND YET I still move them around in big blocks which are very powerful to the front and very weak in the sides, not because of any sort of requirement but because of how the pike rules interact with the fight and maneuver rules. I could go into detail, but essentially the existence of a pike block (and its weak flanks) is an emergent property of how the whole rule-set interacts, rather than simply being mandatory.

The same thing applies to other armies too - spear blocks are common, sword-blocks are uncommon (only because swordsmen get little benefit from ranks, so you typically see them supported by spears or pikes), but battle lines are common (and double deep battle lines if the models have shieldwall are common), etc. You tend to see ranked up units increase as the number of models in the army increases, because having ranks still increases depth. It's just that typically, armies without pikes or spears prefer width to depth because, hey, being flanked sucks.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/21 22:15:53


 
   
Made in ca
Brave High Elf Commander





British Columbia

Unit1126PPL both makes an excellent point and a strong argument for trying GWs best ruleset (and it's not even close)

 Crimson Devil wrote:
That's what 7th edition is about. Yelling "Forge the Narrative Pussy!" while kicking your opponent in the dick.
 BlaxicanX wrote:
A young business man named Tom Kirby, who was a pupil of mine until he turned greedy, helped the capitalists hunt down and destroy the wargamers. He betrayed and murdered Games Workshop.


 
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka







 Eldarain wrote:
Unit1126PPL both makes an excellent point and a strong argument for trying GWs best ruleset (and it's not even close)


...I have yet to see a pike block in Blood Bowl.

2019 Plog - Dysartes Twitches - 2019 Output

My Twitch stream - going live at 7pm GMT Tuesday & Thursday, 12pm Sunday (work permitting).

Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
 
   
Made in ca
Brave High Elf Commander





British Columbia

 Dysartes wrote:
 Eldarain wrote:
Unit1126PPL both makes an excellent point and a strong argument for trying GWs best ruleset (and it's not even close)


...I have yet to see a pike block in Blood Bowl.

They should add some so it can get a bit closer to the champ

 Crimson Devil wrote:
That's what 7th edition is about. Yelling "Forge the Narrative Pussy!" while kicking your opponent in the dick.
 BlaxicanX wrote:
A young business man named Tom Kirby, who was a pupil of mine until he turned greedy, helped the capitalists hunt down and destroy the wargamers. He betrayed and murdered Games Workshop.


 
   
Made in gb
Dakka Veteran





Wait, people are unable to turn their heads?
They don’t notice a group of enemies walking up beside them somehow?

Made me laugh that you could flank a unit with chariots.
Possibly one of the noisiest things on a battlefield and it’s able to sneak up on 20+ People that don’t see it coming.

Yes, some units like pikemen obviously fight better from a frontal attack.
But no one notices?
Shield walls were able to be dropped, turned 90 degrees and formed again in moments.
Yet in fantasy they are just all stood there unaware?

Flanking from a covered point (ambush) makes sense as it’s a surprise, there is little to no time to react.
Flanking on a giant open battlefield though?
Even if that unit doesn’t see it another would call out to them.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




AoS is a good alternative but its swapping one "written in stone" ruleset for another. Having the correct rule books, models, adhereing to minimum units, WSYIWYG etc.

It pays to have a more laid-back alternative for when a rule set is going through a rough patch. For example, we grew frustrated with Adeptus Titanicus over the last year but instead of declaring it all a waste of time and money, we had Horizon Wars to fall back on. When Aeronautica turned out to use hexes and came with the added cost of more books and extras, HW once again had our back. AT has recently picked up again so we will probably play more of it going forward.

One good thing about AoS is that, unlike 40K, its fantasy setting is very compatiable with many other games. Dragon Rampant, Frostgrave and D&D are but a few that spring to mind. If AoS goes sunny side up then you don't have to count your losses and sell up.

Casual gamer, casual fun! 
   
Made in es
Nimble Ellyrian Reaver





Jackal90 wrote:
Wait, people are unable to turn their heads?
They don’t notice a group of enemies walking up beside them somehow?

Made me laugh that you could flank a unit with chariots.
Possibly one of the noisiest things on a battlefield and it’s able to sneak up on 20+ People that don’t see it coming.

Yes, some units like pikemen obviously fight better from a frontal attack.
But no one notices?
Shield walls were able to be dropped, turned 90 degrees and formed again in moments.
Yet in fantasy they are just all stood there unaware?

Flanking from a covered point (ambush) makes sense as it’s a surprise, there is little to no time to react.
Flanking on a giant open battlefield though?
Even if that unit doesn’t see it another would call out to them.


The point is probably simulation, as that is what wargames are.

Flanking maneuver was quite a big deal by the accounts of some important battles.
Did Hannibal's cavalry sneak up totally unnoticed happily slaughtering Romans at Cannae? Probably not, as the Romans taking the charge most likely turned at some point to face the threat (can't imagine them casually waiting to the stabbed in the back). Still, the effect of charging the flank was significant.

So when you are playing with little plastic men, you are basically representing this in an abstract way. The same way armies are not composed of 12 man regiments, that is just an abstraction of a much larger number. Some may like the way a game simulates this, or not, the point being not to consider it a 100% accurate depiction of real life.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Falls Church, VA

I mean, to go back to the LOTR example, we don't even have to abstract why it's important.

Your men can't move. Part of the process of the LOTR fighting mechanics is that they are fluid, and room to give a little ground when losing is important. Other friendly troops can make room for you to maneuver (typically one other guy, encouraging a second rank, or 3 ranks only if staggered). Easterlings train in pike phalanxes, so they can have 2 guys get out of the way (permitting 3 ranks, perfect size for pikes) if the front rank is in danger of betting pushed down.

If your guy doesn't have the space to get shoved around by the enemy, he just gets squashed and can't avoid their attacks as well (the enemy literally gets double damage). So what happens if the guy behind him is defending against someone to his left, and the man in front of him is beating him in the swordfight? The man on either side of him is tied up in their own fights... well, he has no room to give ground, he just gets killed.

Being flanked reduces your mobility in the Fight section, which while they're tiny 1" moves representing the individual soldiers winning or losing their duels, can make a huge outcome in the difference of those duels. Being flanked throws the formation into disarray, and dramatically weights the fight against the losing side. Also, for obvious reasons, being flanked restricts your movement in the Movement phase as well, but that's more of a strategic concern (as strategic you can get in a wargame) compared to the microtactical interactions at the sharp pointy end. It gets even worse with pikes and spears, as obviously they can't support the man to their front if they've got a man to their side! The whole spear line / pike block starts to unravel and it's a disaster if the enemy slams into your flank.

And yes, obviously getting on someone's flank doesn't mean anything if it just becomes their front. If you haven't placed something to their front, it is indeed trivial for my Easterlings to make a right face, shuffle the ranks around a little, and form a new battle line. It slows them down (reforming takes time in LOTR if you want formations to stay together, which you do, because you'll leave the reforming models behind if your main body moves, since they expended some movement reforming). But it isn't really crippling.

However, the term flank suggests there's already a front. And this is actually where playing Easterlings is super rewarding. I don't have access to ghosts or Aragorns or wizards or anything, but I do have the heaviest cavalry in the game.

Easterlings are experts at Hammer and Anvil. Their pikes are resilient and powerful from the front, and the Phalanx special rule they possess also makes them far more flexible than other army's pike blocks, which are incredibly rigid by necessity. These blocks form an excellent buzzsaw-like battleline, that requires considerable combat power from the enemy army to repulse - they advance slowly but are very dangerous.

Conversely, on the other horn of the enemy's dilemma, they have Easterling Cataphracts. These cataphracts are very heavy cavalry (as the name might suggest) but are also the only cavalry in the entire game with a War Drum, which also makes them among the fastest cavalry. You can't charge on the same turn you play the war-drum, so the mobility is more strategic than tactical (easy to do big sweeping moves, but once the battle is joined the Cataphracts prefer to stay in a dense ball of really tough anger). Even their horses are heavily barded, making it very difficult for archery to stop them.

This army mix results in a flexible pike phalanx that advances to the enemy and pins their front, while groups of cavalry work their way around the enemy flank (while also doing a balancing act to protect the flanks of the pikemen!) and conduct devastating heavy cavalry charges at the pivotal moment.

Now, as with any plan, the enemy has a vote, so it doesn't always work out this way, but it's an example of how game rules that literally don't even define what a unit is can still have "units" because the rules themeslves are well written.

This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2020/08/22 13:40:06


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Jackal90 wrote:
Wait, people are unable to turn their heads?
They don’t notice a group of enemies walking up beside them somehow?

Made me laugh that you could flank a unit with chariots.
Possibly one of the noisiest things on a battlefield and it’s able to sneak up on 20+ People that don’t see it coming.

Yes, some units like pikemen obviously fight better from a frontal attack.
But no one notices?
Shield walls were able to be dropped, turned 90 degrees and formed again in moments.
Yet in fantasy they are just all stood there unaware?

Flanking from a covered point (ambush) makes sense as it’s a surprise, there is little to no time to react.
Flanking on a giant open battlefield though?
Even if that unit doesn’t see it another would call out to them.


And yet time and time again in history flanking a battleline was DECISIVE. Indeed, upon seeing an enemy unit bearing down on a flank would often cause said battleline to fall apart before the flankers even came within melee range.

Why? Simple. The fear of being attacked from a blind side, or being sandwiched between two enemies and getting literally stabbed in the back is strong, even among experienced troops.

Pike blocks, and to a lesser extent spear blocks, are even more vulnerable. The price of having two, three, four or more spears or pikes threatening the area in front of your unit means you have long weapons. Turning those long weapons takes time, and the longer they are the more intermeshed they are, meaning it takes longer still. Long and short, a pike block simply CANNOT turn fast enough to deal with a flank charge. Breitenfild would have turned out very differently had Pappenheim been around to lead a cavalry charge against Gustav's open flank once John George fled, instead of the glacially slow tercio advance that left him plenty of time to realign his forces. The Battle of Pydna was a Roman victory because the Macedonian pike units couldn't maintain the close spacing and coordination needed to protect each other's flanks, allowing the Romans to attack into the gaps and shatter them.

Even in modern warfare, being flanked is bad news. When an enemy platoon hits your platoon in the flank, odds are you only have one squad on that flank and is SERIOUSLY outnumbered. Likewise in melee combat, the guy on the corner has three or four guys after him, and generally he doesn't live very long. Now the next guy is vulnerable, and so on and so forth. Pretty soon you've got flankers running down the back of your line killing people who never see it coming. Seen it done many a time in modern re-enactments.

Long and short. FLANKING MATTERS in warfare. Units that are flanked generally cease to exist as viable units in very short order. And we have thirty centuries of experience demonstrating it.

CHAOS! PANIC! DISORDER!
My job here is done. 
   
Made in us
Napoleonics Obsesser




MN

 Arbitrator wrote:
Or try a non-GW game.


Quoted for truth!

Do you like Free Wargames?
http://bloodandspectacles.blogspot.com/ 
   
Made in fi
Decrepit Dakkanaut





Jackal90 wrote:
Wait, people are unable to turn their heads?
They don’t notice a group of enemies walking up beside them somehow?

Made me laugh that you could flank a unit with chariots.
Possibly one of the noisiest things on a battlefield and it’s able to sneak up on 20+ People that don’t see it coming.

Yes, some units like pikemen obviously fight better from a frontal attack.
But no one notices?
Shield walls were able to be dropped, turned 90 degrees and formed again in moments.
Yet in fantasy they are just all stood there unaware?

Flanking from a covered point (ambush) makes sense as it’s a surprise, there is little to no time to react.
Flanking on a giant open battlefield though?
Even if that unit doesn’t see it another would call out to them.


Guess you haven't grasped concept of flanking and why it's so effective in the real world...

12 factions for Lord of The Rings
4663
11772 pts(along with lots of unpainted unsorted stuff)
5265 pts
5150 pts
~3200 pts Knights

 
   
Made in gb
[DCM]
Battlefield Tourist





On an Express Elevator to Hell!!

 Dysartes wrote:
 Eldarain wrote:
Unit1126PPL both makes an excellent point and a strong argument for trying GWs best ruleset (and it's not even close)


...I have yet to see a pike block in Blood Bowl.


haha.. I was going to say that Epic Armageddon doesn't have it per se (although you do have cross-fire which I think helps to illustrate the same)

Epic 30K&40K! A new players guide, contributors welcome https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/751316.page
Small but perfectly formed! A Great Crusade Epic 6mm project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/694411.page
Excellent discussion forum & information collection for Epic and other small scale miniatures: http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/index.php
 
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




UK

Imagine standing in a football crowd. Hundreds of people all shouting and making a noise all around you; your block all focused on what is in front of you - the game - the enemy.

That's where your primary attention is. On the enemy likely advancing toward you. That's where the fight "should" be. It's your focus of fear and anticipation. With the noise of battle and other people around you and with your focus forward its very likely that a block of the enemy (esp on horses) can get around behind. Terrain is rarely if never flat; a hill or rise or trees might mask an approach just enough.


Now if you're in the rear you might look back more so; you might see the enemy or a hint of something. Now you're tapping the person next to you; getting them to turn. Your commander out front is giving orders to focus forward; perhaps even march forward or brace for the forward. You and the back row (who might also be the less experienced combatants - the more experienced being closer to the front and middle where they are more likely to know to hold the line and not run). The back rows are now splitting with fear, panic and confusion. The commander is giving orders still - if they've not seen the threat then they might think its the rear trying to flee; then there's confusion if they spot the enemy and are then countering the orders they were just giving in order to try and turn a portion of the block to face the new threat


Suddenly instead of 20bodies deep facing one way you are, at best, 10 facing either way. That's half the push, half the focus that you just had.



The bonuses to attacking flanks and rears of unit blocks in wargames is designed to represent that element of confusion in the battle. When things are not going "how they should". It's representing that hills and dips and long grass and trees and bushes hide things; that noise and sound of the battlefield overwhelms.
Heck if you're a dwarf line with muskets firing you're likely creating a big blanket of smoke to further obscure the battlefield. Not to mention the guns making a noise.

So in some wargames you get a bonus in stats to attack those points. It's not that people can't turn or can't spot things; its that their attention is focused somewhere else and that they have orders; fear; training; noise; smoke; Heck are those horses behind us the enemy or our own; are they those foreign allies or mercenaries.

   
Made in us
Excellent Exalted Champion of Chaos





There are a host of fantasy games you can try that are good. If you like AOS... well... we like what we like I guess.

I find AOS to be a rather bad game for a variety of reasons, even after its years of ... did someone say... "refinement"?

Horrifyingly bad balance.
Double IGOUGO turn.
Spam summoning.
Spam mortal wounds.
CCG and Board game comboing.
The ability to charge across the board in one turn making maneuver not particularly very important.

But it has pretty models. And a massive player base. So you get those two things at the expense of pretty much everything else, but I realize those two things are a big big deal to a lot of people.

Kings of War, Lord of the Rings, Conquest, Oathmark, warhammer 6th edition, houseruled warhammer 8th edition, hell even 9th age... these are fantasy games for people like me that will find those experiences miles above anything AOS regurgitates out onto the table.

However you do so at the expense of the massive player base.

Parabellum Conquest Vanguard and champion of all things Conquest: The Last Argument of Kings

www.underspire.net for all things Conquest 
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka







 Pacific wrote:
 Dysartes wrote:
 Eldarain wrote:
Unit1126PPL both makes an excellent point and a strong argument for trying GWs best ruleset (and it's not even close)


...I have yet to see a pike block in Blood Bowl.


haha.. I was going to say that Epic Armageddon doesn't have it per se (although you do have cross-fire which I think helps to illustrate the same)


Epic: Armageddon is definitely up there - I've got my copy of the core book on my shelf, signed by Jervis. They definitely need a proof-reader for that book, though - so many basic errors in there. I did a sweep through because I was getting frustrated, and sent in what I found (which was a lot) - I think I got a thanks in the FAQ at the time, but I could be wrong there, given how long ago it was.

2019 Plog - Dysartes Twitches - 2019 Output

My Twitch stream - going live at 7pm GMT Tuesday & Thursday, 12pm Sunday (work permitting).

Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
 
   
Made in pl
Dakka Veteran




 Eldarain wrote:
 Vulcan wrote:
 McMagnus Mindbullets wrote:
Of course it is. Not because it should be a knee-jerk reaction to some of the elements of 9th, but because it is a great system.


So maneuver is relevant now? Outflanking is possible and has real consequences for the flanked unit? Or is it still 'shove everything to the center and the hardest unit wins'?

Still mostly a card game with miniatures. There's some micro positioning complexity but it's far more gamey than wargamey if that makes sense.


I'd argue AoS flanking is far more "natural" than WFB's.

In WFB, flanking was a gamey bonus, it debuffed enemy LD from equally gamey rank-bonus.

In AoS if you outflank a strung out unit, you can bring more models from your side to hit the enemy than they can pile in to hit you later, offering instant on-board advantage in killing power, which (assuming dice are with you) translates to enemy taking more casualties and having to take morale test with higher penalty for dead models.

The one downside to AoS flanking is that it does depend on how well you move models and do with them in combat rather than how good you are at basic maths so...

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/26 12:39:24


 
   
Made in gb
[DCM]
Battlefield Tourist





On an Express Elevator to Hell!!

Yes although the combat result in WHFB wasn't really gamey - it was an abstract way or mechanism of representing how likely you were to win a fight as a result of varying factors: those being how many ranks deep you were (troops who know they have got a solid group of their fellows behind them are less likely to run), being hit in the flank or rear ("oh my god they are all around us"), even through to whether a musician or battle standard might give your troops that extra push. The result, in addition to how many casualties had been caused, resulted in an estimation of who had won and who would be pushed back. I don't know for sure but I would guess that the rules probably started as a base from historical wargames as you see these kind of features in pretty much every mass combat wargame going. I know Rick Priestly was/is a big fan of historical wargames, if you think WHFB was used as the base for Warhammer Historicals when that was about and he has now go on to do Hail Caesar and the like with Warlord Games.

Epic 30K&40K! A new players guide, contributors welcome https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/751316.page
Small but perfectly formed! A Great Crusade Epic 6mm project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/694411.page
Excellent discussion forum & information collection for Epic and other small scale miniatures: http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/index.php
 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Falls Church, VA

(In LOTR those factors are emergent from the rules rather than requiring more rules to represent the abstraction tho)
   
Made in gb
[DCM]
Battlefield Tourist





On an Express Elevator to Hell!!

Yes that is very true Unit1126PLL - there are different ways of approaching it and ending up with the same result in game terms. What works for rank&file square bases (and a game that is built around the movement of those blocks) won't work for individual/single units.

For me it's an added dimension of gameplay that I enjoy. I think everyone who has played WHFB or a similar game has known the satisfaction of drawing an enemy unit onto a defensive block (sometimes tricking them into doing it, withdrawing with skirmish troops etc) and then smashing that unit on the flanks and over-running it (to hear the lamentation of their women! ) By comparison, I know AoS has got some beautiful minis and an army of them on the mental terrain looks really impressive, but when the game just ends up looking like 9-year-olds playing football and scrumming in the centre of a field, chucking more in from each side, it just feels like short change by comparison.

But I know this discussion has been repeated on many, many threads over the past few years and resulted in grown men crying and burning their armies so I'll stop there!


Epic 30K&40K! A new players guide, contributors welcome https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/751316.page
Small but perfectly formed! A Great Crusade Epic 6mm project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/694411.page
Excellent discussion forum & information collection for Epic and other small scale miniatures: http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/index.php
 
   
Made in us
Excellent Exalted Champion of Chaos





If aos had a concept of facing then it could be as easy as giving a bonus to hit from the flank or rear, which would then make positioning matter a lot more.

But I also realize that what they were going for with AOS was dead simple rules that children on up could play (thats not a knock thats just stating what designers have already said) and where rules mastery was not an obstacle (the more rules you add the more you have to memorize and get good at - the less fun for many people)

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/26 15:30:50


Parabellum Conquest Vanguard and champion of all things Conquest: The Last Argument of Kings

www.underspire.net for all things Conquest 
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




UK

I find facing works in games with smaller model counts; with a larger model count of AoS armies like skaven facing on individual troops can start to become more and more of a faff for the game.

It works with formations and blocks of infantry because 20-30-40-60 models are on one base with only 4 facings; for a unit of that many models its each one you've got to keep track of when moving and even more so for resolving attacks.


For AoS it could work if they did it like Warmachine; troops don't have it but anything on a superlarge base does.

   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Falls Church, VA

LOTR has no concept of facing. It doesn't even have a concept of units.

But orientation of your battleline still matters, so facing emerges organically. I'm never going to advocate a game that makes me micromanage the direction my models are pointed, lol.
   
Made in us
Excellent Exalted Champion of Chaos





I'll never understand those counter arguments. Mainly because I've used rules like that in large scale games and they worked just fine. You are either in the front or you aren't. If not in front (flank or rear), gain +1 to hit or whatever. Really pretty easy I've found. The big negative that I hear a lot on those rules though is that it will slow the game down because super fiddly people will become even more super fiddly. But I'm ok with that because if it gives more weight to maneuver, I'm all in.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/26 16:17:44


Parabellum Conquest Vanguard and champion of all things Conquest: The Last Argument of Kings

www.underspire.net for all things Conquest 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Falls Church, VA

 auticus wrote:
I'll never understand those counter arguments. Mainly because I've used rules like that in large scale games and they worked just fine. You are either in the front or you aren't. If not in front (flank or rear), gain +1 to hit or whatever. Really pretty easy I've found.


I meant for me managing MY models, lol. My sleeve gets caught on pikes, my opponent shifts my model slightly by accident , I knock over a whole unit moving a book - I'm just clumsy. Most people don't care, ofc, but I can think of one guy specifically who would insist in measuring every tiny deviation from their "previous facing" and griping about it.
   
Made in us
Excellent Exalted Champion of Chaos





Sure. I edited my comment above as you posted on fiddly people.

But I'm often told that if I would just not play people like that, or people who bust the game, I wouldn't hate AOS so much either with the current rules. So I think that same thought applies.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/26 16:19:12


Parabellum Conquest Vanguard and champion of all things Conquest: The Last Argument of Kings

www.underspire.net for all things Conquest 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Unit1126PLL wrote:
LOTR has no concept of facing. It doesn't even have a concept of units.

But orientation of your battleline still matters, so facing emerges organically. I'm never going to advocate a game that makes me micromanage the direction my models are pointed, lol.


Which you've said numerous times before and it's getting repetitive. But I agree, it's a point worth mentioning if not worth harping on. Ideally flanking should matter organically rather than through a separate rule.

Few games are ideal, and however good it is LOTR isn't ideal either. If for no other reason, because I'm not rebasing around a thousand minis onto round bases so I can play it.

CHAOS! PANIC! DISORDER!
My job here is done. 
   
 
Forum Index » Dakka Discussions
Go to: